Letter From Birmingham Jail

ExpandCollapse

New Member

While jailed in Birmingham, Martin Luther King wrote to his fellow clergyman. The posted quote is only a small portion of the actual letter. You can read the entire letter here: Martin Luther King. Some might think MLK was in violation of Romans 13.

So was he right or wrong in breaking the law, given the reason?

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]You express a great deal of anxiety over our willingness to break laws. This is certainly a legitimate concern. Since we so diligently urge people to obey the Supreme Court's decision of 1954 outlawing segregation in the public schools, at first glance it may seem rather paradoxical for us consciously to break laws. One may won ask: "How can you advocate breaking some laws and obeying others?" The answer lies in the fact that there fire two types of laws: just and unjust. I would be the Brat to advocate obeying just laws. One has not only a legal but a moral responsibility to obey just laws. Conversely, one has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. I would agree with St. Augustine that "an unjust law is no law at all".

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Now, what is the difference between the two? How does one determine whether a law is just or unjust? A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. To put it in the terms of St. Thomas Aquinas: An unjust law is a human law that is not rooted in eternal .law and natural law. Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust because segregation distort the soul and damages the personality. It gives the segregator a false sense of superiority and the segregated a false sense of inferiority. Segregation, to use the terminology of the Jewish philosopher Martin Buber, substitutes an "I-it" relationship for an "I-thou" relationship and ends up relegating persons to the status of things. Hence segregation is not only politically, economically and sociologically unsound, it is morally wrong and awful. Paul Tillich said that sin is separation. Is not segregation an existential expression 'of man's tragic separation, his awful estrangement, his terrible sinfulness? Thus it is that I can urge men to obey the 1954 decision of the Supreme Court, for it is morally right; and I can urge them to disobey segregation ordinances, for they are morally wrong.

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Let us consider a more concrete example of just and unjust laws. An unjust law is a code that a numerical or power majority group compels a minority group to obey but does not make binding on itself. This is difference made legal. By the same token, a just law is a code that a majority compels a minority to follow and that it is willing to follow itself. This is sameness made legal. Let me give another explanation. A law is unjust if it is inflicted on a minority that, as a result of being denied the right to vote, had no part in enacting or devising the law. Who can say that the legislature of Alabama which set up that state's segregation laws was democratically elected? Throughout Alabama all sorts of devious methods are used to prevent Negroes from becoming registered voters, and there are some counties in which, even though Negroes constitute a majority of the population, not a single Negro is registered. Can any law enacted under such circumstances be considered democratically structured?

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Sometimes a law is just on its face and unjust in its application. For instance, I have been arrested on a charge of parading without a permit. Now, there is nothing wrong in having an ordinance which requires a permit for a parade. But such an ordinance becomes unjust when it is used to maintain segregation and to deny citizens the First Amendment privilege of peaceful assembly and protest.[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]I hope you are able to ace the distinction I am trying to point out. In no sense do I advocate evading or defying the law, as would the rabid segregationist. That would lead to anarchy. One who breaks an unjust law must do so openly, lovingly, and with a willingness to accept the penalty. I submit that an individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Of course, there is nothing new about this kind of civil disobedience. It was evidenced sublimely in the refusal of Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego to obey the laws of Nebuchadnezzar, on the ground that a higher moral law was at stake. It was practiced superbly by the early Christians, who were willing to face hungry lions and the excruciating pain of chopping blocks rather than submit to certain unjust laws of the Roman Empire. To a degree, academic freedom is a reality today because Socrates practiced civil disobedience. In our own nation, the Boston Tea Party represented a massive act of civil disobedience.

[/FONT]​

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]We should never forget that everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was "legal" and everything the Hungarian freedom fighters did in Hungary was "illegal." It was "illegal" to aid and comfort a Jew in Hitler's Germany. Even so, I am sure that, had I lived in Germany at the time, I would have aided and comforted my Jewish brothers. If today I lived in a Communist country where certain principles dear to the Christian faith are suppressed, I would openly advocate disobeying that country's antireligious laws.[/FONT]​

ExpandCollapse

New Member

Romans 13 was written to Christians in Rome about Jews and Gentiles under the heel of Rome. Obey or die. It is not applicable to a democratic republic. Paul spoke to the issues then. He had no concept of a democratic republic, as in the USA.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

Romans 13 was written to Christians in Rome about Jews and Gentiles under the heel of Rome. Obey or die. It is not applicable to a democratic republic. Paul spoke to the issues then. He had no concept of a democratic republic, as in the USA.

King's letter is well-written, whether one agrees with it or not.

Click to expand...

The ten commandments were written to the Jews when they were running from the egyptians so they are not applicable to us today. Riiiiiiiight.:BangHead:

ExpandCollapse

New Member

What happened above is what you find when your daughter signs on with your computer and you don't know about it. Then when you sign on it automatically comes up signing in under her sign in name and you are too tired to realize it. Crazy world we live in and it ain't gettin' any better folks.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

If you say that MLK was wrong, then you also have to say that the founders of this country (USA) were wrong to rebel against the British athourity.

Click to expand...

1) Be careful DeeJay there are some highuppers here on the board that believe we should still be drinking tea at 4PM and saluting the Union Jack. They would have been the Tories that we all know about. They sure are enjoying the blessings of rebellion (as they call it) and have taken no thought about packing up and moving to where they ought to be.

2) MLK was absolutely right. I do not care for his teachers as he listed them but, he was correct and the actions he led people to do were right.

3) The Doctrine of the Civil Magistrate is lost in America. It is not correctly taught in 99% of American Baptist Churches. As it is taught the Germans were wrong to disobey Hitler and the Russians were wrong to disobey Stalin and on and on.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

The Apostle Peter's grand declaration, "We must obey God rather than men" has to be factored in to this discussion. King's ethic, fully worked out, included a recognition that those who engage in civil disobedience must be prepared to accept the consequences of that disobedience. To attempt to avoid arrest and due process would be to suggest that the civil powers have no proper jurisdiction. King would argue that the state is ordained of God to wield the "sword", but that unjust laws have to be challenged in order to bring the state into line with God's standards.

Incidentally, a friend and fellow church member of mine was the young lady who typed Dr. King's letter as it was smuggled out, in bits and pieces, on newspaper margins, toilet tissue, and other scraps. She has a fascinating story to tell!

ExpandCollapse

New Member

The Apostle Peter's grand declaration, "We must obey God rather than men" has to be factored in to this discussion. King's ethic, fully worked out, included a recognition that those who engage in civil disobedience must be prepared to accept the consequences of that disobedience. To attempt to avoid arrest and due process would be to suggest that the civil powers have no proper jurisdiction. King would argue that the state is ordained of God to wield the "sword", but that unjust laws have to be challenged in order to bring the state into line with God's standards.

Incidentally, a friend and fellow church member of mine was the young lady who typed Dr. King's letter as it was smuggled out, in bits and pieces, on newspaper margins, toilet tissue, and other scraps. She has a fascinating story to tell!

Click to expand...

Wow! I would love to be able to sit with her and listen to that story.

Being born in 1965, I was too young to understand what a trying time it must have been for certain folks. I admire Dr. King and would have marched along with him because I believe he was just in doing so. The reaction of authorities and "by-standers" only proves the wicked heart of some men (and women).

ExpandCollapse

Administrator

Administrator

While jailed in Birmingham, Martin Luther King wrote to his fellow clergyman. The posted quote is only a small portion of the actual letter. You can read the entire letter here: Martin Luther King. Some might think MLK was in violation of Romans 13.

So was he right or wrong in breaking the law, given the reason?

Click to expand...

MLK is quoted as saying had he been in Germany at the time of Hitler---he would have come to the aid of the Jew-----well, yes---I suppose with the ability to look back knowing what he knew about German history---had he lived then knowing what he knew at the present

But had he been reared in Germany from childhood like the rest of the citizens there at the time---not knowing nothing but what he heard coming from the radio and newspapers and from word of mouth----most likely 99.999% chance he would have joined in the malay of Krystalnight. He would have been "hoo-dooed" like the rest who were "hoo-dooed" and lived in a state of deniel of anything wrong with bringing terrible insult to the Jewish German citizen!!

ExpandCollapse

New Member

MLK is quoted as saying had he been in Germany at the time of Hitler---he would have come to the aid of the Jew-----well, yes---I suppose with the ability to look back knowing what he knew about German history---had he lived then knowing what he knew at the present

But had he been reared in Germany from childhood like the rest of the citizens there at the time---not knowing nothing but what he heard coming from the radio and newspapers and from word of mouth----most likely 99.999% chance he would have joined in the malay of Krystalnight. He would have been "hoo-dooed" like the rest who were "hoo-dooed" and lived in a state of deniel of anything wrong with bringing terrible insult to the Jewish German citizen!!

Click to expand...

I don't believe that, brother blackbird. I believe Martin Luther King, Jr would have been the good Samaritan we read about in the Bible.

ExpandCollapse

Administrator

Administrator

I don't believe that, brother blackbird. I believe Martin Luther King, Jr would have been the good Samaritan we read about in the Bible.

Click to expand...

Gershom----"could" have been is a better word than "would" have been

The National German citizens "could" have----they all had the potential to --- but many turned their backs while the Jews turned their cheeks

Lets just say that MLK was living in Germany----the year---1936---he knows nothing of democracy---only socialism---the only thing being "fed" to the German people was National Socialism with a twist for hatred---Hitler him own self saying that if he fed the stupid German people a lie long enough---after a while they'd grow to believe with all their hearts it was the truth!!!

Knowing nothing of the ringing of freedom----he(MLK) would choose socialism with its bent toward hatred.----just like you and I would have had we been part of the 80 million citizens.

MLK was born in '29----just a few years after Hitler's Munich Beer Hall feasico and the publication of Mein Kiempt----a publication absorbed by obsessed Germans----a publication ignored by ignorant Americans

By the time MLK would have been old enough to understand what was going on----he would have been learning the Goose Step technique and had made his way in line to receive a Brown shirt---he too, would have been assimulated and would have been one of thousands upon thousands who mysteriously showed up at various German airdromes to "hear the latest!!"

ExpandCollapse

New Member

But the thinking man/woman looks back at history and sees the mistakes made. Then they try to avoid being "hoo-dooed" themselfs. I think that is what MLK was saying. He is saying that looking back knowing what he knows now he would have been on the right side of the issue.

We all can admit that we can be "hoo-dooed", maybe by our up bringing. But at least we should be able to look back and see what was right and what was wrong. And attempt to choose right the next time history repeats itself.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

The National German citizens "could" have----they all had the potential to --- but many turned their backs while the Jews turned their cheeks

Lets just say that MLK was living in Germany----the year---1936---he knows nothing of democracy---only socialism---the only thing being "fed" to the German people was National Socialism with a twist for hatred---Hitler him own self saying that if he fed the stupid German people a lie long enough---after a while they'd grow to believe with all their hearts it was the truth!!!

Knowing nothing of the ringing of freedom----he(MLK) would choose socialism with its bent toward hatred.----just like you and I would have had we been part of the 80 million citizens.

MLK was born in '29----just a few years after Hitler's Munich Beer Hall feasico and the publication of Mein Kiempt----a publication absorbed by obsessed Germans----a publication ignored by ignorant Americans

By the time MLK would have been old enough to understand what was going on----he would have been learning the Goose Step technique and had made his way in line to receive a Brown shirt---he too, would have been assimulated and would have been one of thousands upon thousands who mysteriously showed up at various German airdromes to "hear the latest!!"

Click to expand...

I don't believe that. In that way of thinking, there is no hope for a light to shine in a dark hole, but I feel the opposite is true and I believe Martin Luther King Jr., given the heart that God gave him, would not succumb to such a way of thinking and would stretch out his hand to help and minister to his fellow man.

I have read of another Martin who was brought up and taught a certain way but he became a light in a dark world centuries ago.
So there is always hope for one to rise up and lead the way even among such wicked influences.

ExpandCollapse

New Member

"The heart is deceitful above all things, and desperately wicked: who can know it?"---Jeremiah 17:9

Given the circumstances that surrounded Nazi Germany at the time---had he been a citizen of that fair country NOT knowing then what is known now----he'd been "hoo-dooed" like the rest of 'um!!

The Dietrich Bonhoeffer's and Brother Andrews of the then world were few and far between!! Sad but true!!:tear:

Click to expand...

I was talking to a preacher today and he was telling how he was brought up in church to believe a certain way. But God sparked a light in him and he saw the truth and changed his way of thinking. So he had been hoo-dooed, but prevailed and is now a voice and a light to the right way. God can do the same and that includes you, me, and Martin Luther King, Jr.

I don't believe that men are neccesarily trapped by their surroundings and inevitably given to follow the course they were brought up in. Shucks, even in the 1960's where blacks were brought up to be considered less than whites understood that that wasn't so.

Quick Navigation

Support us!

The management of Baptist Board works very hard to make sure the community is running the best software, best design, and all the other bells and whistles that goes into a forum our size.Your support is much appreciated!